Social organisation of female field voles Microtus agrestis in a population in Southern England

Acta Theriologica

Volumn 51, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 233-242

  Loughran, Michael F E ^a  

^a NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Core areas; Field vole; Home range; Live trapping; Microtus agrestis; Radiotracking; Territoriality

Indexed keywords

BREEDING; HOME RANGE; REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR; RODENT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ENGLAND; EURASIA; EUROPE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

MICROTUS AGRESTIS; MURIDAE;

EID: 33746041850     PISSN: 00017051     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03192675     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Agrell J. 1995. A shift in female social organisation independent of relatedness: an experimental study on the field vole (Microtus agrestis). Behavioural Ecology 6: 182-191.
2. Agrell J., Wolff J. O. and Ylönen H. 1998. Counter-strategies to infanticide in mammals: costs and consequences. Oikos 83: 507-517.
3. Alibhai S. K. and Gipps J. H. W. 1991. Field vole. [In: Handbook of British mammals. 3rd edition. G. B. Corbet and S. Harris, eds]. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford: 203-208.
4. Bekoff M. 1981. Vole population cycles: kin selection or familiarity. Oecologia 48: 131.
5. Berteaux D., Masseboeuf F., Bonzom J., Bergeron J., Thomas D. W. and Lapierre H. 1996. Effect of carrying a radiocollar on expenditure of energy by meadow voles. Journal of Mammalogy 77: 359-363.
6. Burt W. H. 1943. Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 24: 346-352.
7. Cooper M. 1991. Diet selection and spatial dynamics in the field vole Microtus agrestis. PhD thesis, Cardiff, University of Wales: 1-194.
8. David-Gray Z. 1995. The application of DNA fingerprinting to the study of mating strategies. PhD thesis, London University, London: 1-251.
9. de Mendonça P. G. 1999. Impact of radio-collars on yellow-necked mice, Apodemus flavicolis (Mammalia, Rodentia). Mammal Review 29: 129-134.
10. Erlinge S., Hoogenboom I., Agrell J., Nelson J. and Sandell M. 1990a. Density-related home range size and overlap in adult field voles (Microtus agrestis) in southern Sweden. Journal of Mammalogy 71: 597-603.
11. Erlinge S., Agrell J., Nelson J. and Sandell M. 1990b. Social organisation and population dynamics in Microtus agrestis populations. [In: Social systems and population cycles in voles. R. H. Tamarin, R. S. Ostfeld, S. R. Pugh and G. Bujalska, eds]. Advances in life sciences. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel: 45-58.
12. Ferns P. N. 1976. Diet of Microtus agrestis populations in South West Britain. Oikos 27: 506-511.
13. Fortier G. M. and Tamarin R. H. 1998. Movement of meadow voles in response to food and density manipulations: A test of the food-defence and pup-defence hypotheses. Journal of Mammalogy 79: 337-345.
14. Getz L. L., McGuire B., Hofmann J. E., Pizzuto T. and Frase B. 1990. Social organisation and mating system of the prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster. [In: Social systems and population cycles in voles: R. H. Tamarin, R. S. Ostfeld, S. R. Pugh and G. Bujalska, eds]. Advances in life sciences. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland: 69-80.
15. Hayes L. D., Lin K. Y. and Solomon N. G. 2004. Do female prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) immigrants affect space use of conspecific female residents? American Midland Naturalist 151: 88-92.
16. Hrdy S. B. 1979. Infanticide among mammals: a review, classification, and examination of the implications for the reproductive strategies of females. Ethology and Sociobiology 1: 13-40.
17. Kenward R. E. and Hodder K. H. 1995. Ranges V: an analysis system for biological location data. Institute for Terrestrial Ecology, Dorset: 1-75.
18. Koskela E., Mappes T. and Ylönen H. 1997. Territorial behaviour and reproductive success of the bank vole Clethrionomys glareolus females. Journal of Animal Ecology 66: 341-349.
19. Koskela E., Juutistenaho P., Mappes T. and Oksanen T. A. 2000. Offspring defence in relation to litter size and age: experiment in the bank vole Clethrionomys glareolus. Evolutionary Ecology 14: 99-109.
20. Krebs C. J. 1999. Ecological methodology. 2nd edition. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, California: 192.
21. Lambin X. and Krebs C. J. 1993. Influence of female relatedness on the demography of Townsend's vole population in spring. Journal of Animal Ecology 62: 536-550.
22. Le Boulenge-Nguyen P. Y. and Le Boulenge E. 1986. A new ear-tag for small mammals. Journal of Zoology, London 209: 302-304.
23. Lin K. Y., Hayes L. D. and Solomon N. G. 2004. Effects of female immigrants on demography and social organization of prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) populations. Journal of Mammalogy 85: 781-787.
24. Loughran M. F. E. 1999. A Study of the demography and social organisation of the field vole, Microtus agrestis, in relation to food resources. PhD thesis, London University: 1-254.
25. Madison D. M. and McShea W. J. 1987. Seasonal changes in reproductive tolerance, spacing and social organisation in meadow voles: a microtine model. American Zoologist 27: 899-908.
26. Mappes T., Ylönen H. and Viitala J. 1995. Higher reproductive success among kin groups of bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus). Ecology 76: 1276-1282.
27. Myllymäki A. 1977. Intraspecific competition and home range dynamics in the field vole Microtus agrestis. Oikos 29: 553-569.
28. Ostfeld R.S. 1985. Limiting resources and territoriality in microtine rodents. The American Naturalist 126: 1-15.
29. Ostfeld R. S. 1986. Territoriality and mating system of Californian voles. Journal of Animal Ecology 55: 691-706.
30. Ostfeld R. S. 1990. The ecology of territoriality in small mammals. Trends in Evolution and Ecology 5: 411-415.
31. Perrin M. R. 1971. Exploratory behaviour as related to trapping results and population estimation in the vole Microtus agrestis hirtus. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Exeter: 1-316.
32. Pusenius J. and Viitala J. 1993a. Demography and regulation of breeding density in the field vole Microtus agrestis. Annales Zoologici Fennici 30: 133-142.
33. Pusenius J. and Viitala J. 1993b. Varying spacing behaviour of breeding field voles, Microtus agrestis. Annales Zoologici Fennici 30: 143-152.
34. Rooney S. M., Wolfe A. and Hayden T. J. 1998. Autocorrelated data in telemetry studies: time to independence and the problem of behavioural effects. Mammal Review 28: 89-98.
35. Samuel M. D., Pierce D. J. and Garton E. O. 1985. Identifying areas of concentrated use within the home range. Journal of Animal Ecology 54: 711-719.
36. Stanford W. 1995. The influence of female social behaviour on the population dynamics of the field vole Microtus agrestis. PhD thesis, London University, London: 1-384.
37. Varty N. 1987. A study of range and activity in the short tailed vole (Microtus agrestis) by live trapping and telemetry. PhD thesis, Kings College, London University, London: 1-402.
38. Viitala J. 1977. Social organisation in cyclic sub arctic populations of the voles Clethrionomys rufocanus and Microtus agrestis. Annales Zoologici Fennici 14: 53-93.
39. White G. C. and Garrott R. A. 1990. Analysis of wildlife radiotracking data. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, California: 33-123.
40. Wolff J. O. and Cicirello, D. M. 1989. Field evidence for sexual selection and resource competition infanticide in white footed mice. Animal Behaviour 38: 637-642.
41. Wolff J. O. 1993. Why are female mammals territorial? Oikos 68: 364-370.
42. Wolff J. O. 1997. Population regulation in mammals: An evolutionary perspective. Journal of Animal Ecology 66: 1-13.
43. Worton B. J. 1989. Kernel methods for estimating the utilisation distribution in home range studies. Ecology 70: 164-168.
44. Ylönen H. 1990. Phenotypic flexibility in the social organisation of Clethrionomys. [In: Social systems and population cycles in voles. R. H. Tamarin, R. S. Ostfeld, S. R. Pugh and G. Bujalska, eds]. Advances in life sciences. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel: 203-212.